Who are they trying to kid?

Dinky Toys 27D – Land Rover (1)

Originally uploaded by Stephen Edmonds.

In last weeks Saturday Independent, and no doubt other newspapers and magazines, Land Rover had a full page advert – telling us how wonderful they are, and how GREEN they are?!

I’m supposed to be impressed that they have just unveiled a new concept vehicle with potential CO2 emissions of 120g/km – note the two words there –

CONCEPT – so not something that any of us will be driving, not something that is likely to make it onto the streets at all.

POTENTIAL – even if it does make it onto the roads, it only has the potential for emissions of 120g/km, and let’s be honest – do you know if that’s a low or high amount of emissions, we are left to assume that it’s low. And even then it’s only a potential, the actual emissions will depend on how the vehicle is driven and a myriad of other factors.

I’m supposed to be impressed that they have, since 1997, reduced the emissions in their plant by 30% – but what they don’t tell us is how high they were in the first place?

I’m supposed to be impressed that they are ‘offsetting the first 45,000 miles of all new Land Rovers sold in the UK (what about the ones sold overseas?) – but they don’t say how they are doing this, and anyway ‘offsetting’ seems to me just a way for companies and individuals to feel better about their energy consumption.

I am impressed that many conservation and humanitarian organisations choose to use Land Rover vehicles – but that is because they have little choice given the tough conditions in many parts of the world, not because they are environmentally friendly. These are places where hardy four-wheel drive vehicles are not a fashion accessory, or something to impress clients – these are places where having a four-wheel drive is the only way to move around.

When will we learn?

Prices Go Up
Originally uploaded by figilopes.

I’ve just popped up to the Co-Op for a lettuce, in front of me in the queue a young lad was buying himself a bag of chocolate and a bottle of pop – just those two items, which were to be eaten straightaway.

The woman at the check out automatically, without thinking, put them both in a bag and handed it to him.

My turn – and she actually went to put my single lettuce in a plastic bag!! I obviously declined.

As I walked back to the car there was the young boy eating his chocolate and drinking his pop – at least he put the bag in the litter bin – but it wasn’t even used for more than 2 minutes. WHAT A WASTE!!

What the hell is the world coming to – this is totally ridiculous! I’m really mad about this – ggggggrrrrrrrrhhhhhhh!

We use on average 167 a year
Only one in every 200 bags is recycled
Plastics can take up to 400 years to break down in a landfill

DON’T USE PLASTIC CARRIER BAGS – use a cloth bag (if you ask me nicely I’ll send you one!)

Labels, labels, labels

Have you ever wondered about the ‘green’ labels that have been appearing on the packets of the food and household products you buy? Do you know what ‘Freedom Food’ is or what the ‘Soil Association Organic Standard’ actually means?

Well, the The Ecologist magazine has, in April, given a handy explanation of some of the most common.

Freedom Food
Set up in 1994 by the RSPCA, this mark is found on eggs, dairy, meat, poultry and salmon; and means that the animals involved have been reared, handled, transported and slaughtered to standards devised and monitored by the RSPCA.

But the standards are actually only aspirational, and therefore if standards are not met it is still possible to gain the mark; many of the standards therefore are usually little better than the legal minimum requirements.

Read their website

FSC
This is one that I always look for on wood and timber products. FSC accreditation certifies wood against 10 basic criteria that include the environmental, social and economic impacts of the forest industry.

Since wood products need only contain 50 per cent FSC-certified wood to gain the label it is necessary to always read the label (which should state this). All in all, this is a good label to go for – but better still is to buy second hand furniture – so no new trees will need to be cut down.

Read their website

European Ecolabel
This is a Europe wide label for non-food products (such as copy paper, paints, detergents and even tourist accommodation). It covers a variety of environmental impacts such as production energy use, waste generation and recyclability. Products must be independently certified, and meet strict criteria. In the UK the scheme is administered by Defra.

Because the whole lifecycle of the product is assessed these products will be considerably ‘greener’ than most other similar products, and will consume less energy, pollute less, or create less waste at the end of its life.

Read their website

Organic
This one is a difficult one – and it all depends on the mark, but basically the one to look for is the Soil Association Standard. In the UK the Soil Association certificate foods as organic under strict minimum EU standards.

However, you still need to read the labels as there are two categories; Category 1 Organic products contain a minimum of 95 per cent organic ingredients by weight (this is most products in the UK), Category 2 contain 70 to 95 per cent – the products can be labelled ‘made with organic ingredients’ and are mainly due to the fact that some ingredients need not be or cannot be organic (for instance, water).

Another thing to watch for is Food Miles – organic is great, but not if it’s been flown round the world to reach your supermarket (supermarkets are the worst for doing this).

Read their website

Fairtrade
This has gained much ground in the last couple of years – rightly so. It’s a strategy for poverty alleviation, making sure that producers in the developing world receive a fair price for their goods.

Although a Fairtrade mark does not guarantee that the product has been fairly traded throughout the supply chain – it could be fair trade cotton but still be made in a sweatshop. Look for the FTO (Fair Trade Organisation) mark which will mean that the product is produced by a company with fair principles from the ground up.

Although it is always better to buy Fairtrade where possible, it is also better for the environment to try to scale down on purchases of exotic goods which have been flown long distances.

Read their <a href=”
http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/” target=”_blank”>website

Red Tractor

This label comes from the food industry themselves and is, in my opinion, ‘greenwash’ – it means nothing!

Compassion in World Farming has criticised the scheme’s animal welfare standards, saying that it gives few assurances that animals are treated any better than the minimum legal guidelines – and in some cases even those don’t apply.

This label is meaningless in terms of ethical or environmental criteria – it can just be seen to mean that the food is produced in Britain.

Read their <a href=”
http://www.redtractor.org.uk/site/rt_home.php” target=”_blank”>website

Leaf Marque

Like the Red Tractor label this mark comes from the food industry themselves; it aims to encourage efficient farming systems that look after the land and the rural community.

Since it does not guarantee that food will be organic, non-GM, UK-produced or that the animals will not have been intensively reared it seems as pointless as the Red Tractor.

Read their <a href=”
http://www.leafuk.org/leaf/” target=”_blank”>website

Marine Stewardship Council

Initially set up by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Unilever, this council is now an independently- run non-profit organisation, however it still continues to get funds from Unilever. Its aim was to help preserve fish stocks by certifying well-managed and sustainable fisheries; however it has been criticised for not applying its standards evenly and not address labour problems in the industry.

If standards are not being applied evenly this label is of little use. Your best policy is to avoid prepacked fish, and always ask the fishmonger where and how the fish was caught. Learn which fish are sustainable at fishonline.

Read their website

European Energy Label/Energy Star

These labels appear mainly on ‘white goods’ and computers; all European manufacturers and retailers must tell you about the energy efficiency of these goods. This label is certified by the Energy Savings Trust (EST) in conjunction with industry and government. Items are rated A (most efficient) to G.

Since certification is left to manufacturers, and independent analyses have revealed that some have overestimated the energy efficiency of their products, this label can only be treated as a guide. Obviously purchase A rated appliances, but more importantly, assess if you really need an ‘electric’ toothbrush/shaver/tin opener, and since fridges and freezers are designed to last at least 15 years do you really need to replace yours? Don’t ‘update’ your computer just because yours is looking dated or the memory is full – think about adding memory (if it’s possible).

Read their website, and here

Mobilus Loop

This label appears to be on just about everything, but it’s not always what it seems and it’s necessary to read the label closely.

The label can mean both that the product is made from recycled material, but also that the product is recyclable (where facilities exist – which often they don’t).

When the item is made from recycled material it might be totally, or more likely, it’s a proportion of the material involved. Also, being ‘recyclable’ is not always the case in your local area (eg. country!) – and anyway, in the case of plastic regeneration, the process is high in terms of energy use and hazardous by-products.

The bottom line is – do you really need all that packaging (if not, buy something without it all), and read the label closely. Know what can and cannot be recycled in your area (your local council website will help) and only buy products packaged in those materials.

Read their <a href=”
http://www.recycling-guide.org.uk/” target=”_blank”>website

So, now you know – no excuse, and if you’ve read all the way down here to the bottom – well done!!

CO2 emissions

What did you do granny?
Originally uploaded by Ms. Moll.

If you listen to the government, and many climate change sceptics they’ll tell you that the UK is only responsible for two per cent of global CO2 emissions. But it’s a load of rubbish!

What this figure doesn’t take into account is the carbon footprint of British companies when they invest in other regions of the world – bringing the official figure of 0.7 billion tonnes up to 3.8 billion tonnes.

This means that the UK’s actual global CO2 emissions are more like 12-15 per cent.

As a nation we have to take responsibility, so that our grandchildren don’t need to ask the question.

Building Site England

Power?
Originally uploaded by Ms. Moll.

Hidden in the Society section of todays Guardian newspaper is an article that should put the fear of Bob into anyone who loves our country.

Following the publication of a review by economist Kate Barker, a Government White Paper is proposing a ‘national planning commission’ to judge on future big infrastructure project such as nuclear power stations, airport expansion, transport corridors etc.

This, it is proposed, will speed up the process of getting these massive building schemes approved – national policy statements to parliament will put them forward in the ‘public interest’.

However, for those affected by these schemes current system of public enquiries (as is currently the case in the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act), and local decisions could be weakened.

The review also suggested some building on green belt and a relaxation on restrictions on supermarket development on the edge of towns and cities (scrapping the need for retailers to prove that there is insufficient retail space).

If this happens, and I truly hope it doesn’t, the map of proposed and planned large infrastructure building that accompanied the article is terrrifying -

22 new waste incinerators
6 renewed nuclear power stations
20 airport expansions
68 new national road building schemes (not to mention the smaller local ones planned)

a paltry 1 (blink and you might miss it) Railway (London to Edinburgh via York)

Oh, and the only possible good thing (if the Nimby’s don’t get in the way) – 35 wind farms.

This would be a disaster for the English Countryside – tantamount to rape.

Brown napkin – Green message

I love the little notes that Pret put on their products, but the best yet has to be on their 100% recycled blown napkins.

‘This ugly brown napkins is made from 100% recycled stock (pretty white napkins are bleached which can result in environmentally damaging toxic waste). If Pret staff get all serviette-ish and hand you huge bunches of napkins (which you don’t need or want) please give them the evil eye. Waste not want not.’

How refreshing – if only all places cared half as much (and even if it is ‘green wash’, at least they are doing something).

Saving the world

Well, helping anyway!

Tonight I did something I’ve been meaning to do for an age – I went to a Greenpeace meeting in Sheffield.

A small group met in the Red Lion in town to discuss the latest campaigns, in particular at the moment is the issue surrounding the replacement of Trident.

On Saturday the group will have a stall on Fargate to get signatures against the replacment of Trident – I’m hoping to go along to help and take photos of the stall and the signed posters.

I’d like to get more involved with Greenpeace, but probably more on a national level. Hopefully I’ll have the time to also be involved in the local group.

The day after tomorrow

How is it that the Americans can make a film like ‘The day after tomorrow’, graphically showing the affects of climate change – yet still three years after the making of the film little is being done (I had originally written that ‘nothing’ was being done – but things are changing – slowly, too slowly). One thing that would change if they made the film now would be the role of FEMA; after New Orleans the Americans must know that FEMA are about as much use as an umbrella in a hurricane.

I’ve just watched the film and I have to say it’s the most terrifying thing I’ve ever seen. Although I don’t see it as doom laden as it is the in film – anyone would think that the Americans were on their own trying to keep the human race going; I think (hope) that the southern hemisphere would at least try to help.

I’ll grant you, the Bush administration have at least acknowledged that climate change is happening – but they arrogantly believe that they will save the world with their technology – just like in the movies.

I have to admit to having a distinct feeling that it’s too late – we’ve completely fucked the planet and we are all going to suffer because of the arrogance of the human race. I think the saddest thing is that it’s highly likely that we will take most of the rest of the species of the planet with us. That won’t stop me from trying but it does make me wonder what the point is sometimes.

Humans have changed the planet beyond anything we can imagine.

RE: Blairs new car tax – Stop it now!

I received the text below in an email tonight. Normally I would not rise to the bait – but tonight I did – my answer is also below.

Subject: Blairs new car tax – Stop it now!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/

the deadline is 20th February and we need over 750,000 signatures to stop them introducing this new tax. Please let everyone you can know about this ’stealth tax” Apparently they have not let anyone know this petition is on thier web site – I wonder why!!

The above link is to petition against the new proposed car tax scheme. The government proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you will have tp purchase a tracking device for
your car and paying a monthly bill to use it. The device will cost about £200 and in recent study by the BBC, th elowest monthly bill will be £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver. A non working mother who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 per month. On top of this massive tax increase you will be tracked. Somebody will know where you are at all times.

They will also know how fast you are going, so even if you accidently creep over a speed limit in time you can probably expect a Notice of Intended Prosecution with your monthly bill.

If you care about our freedom and stopping the constant bashing of the car driver, please sign the petition at the above web address.

The idea of tracking every vehicle at all times is sinister and wrong. Road pricing is already here with the high level of taxation on fuel. The more you travel – the more tax you pay.

It will be an unfair tax on those who live apart from families and poorer people who will not be able to afford the high monthly costs.

Please Mr Blair – forget about road pricing and concentrate on improving our roads to reduce
congestion.

Please pass along

My reply:

Although I do not agree with the idea of a ‘box’ in my car that tells the government where I am and where I’ve been, I do not feel that I can sign this petition.

I do not oppose taxation on driving – there should be more – I agree with road tolls and/or higher fuel duty for gas guzzlers. I understand the comment about parents driving their children to school – but they should be walking or getting the bus if it’s too far to walk (eg. going to schools near where they live), and about people who live further away from their
families (like me) – but we have a public transport system (I know it could do with a lot of improvement).

This tax will not hit the poor people as many of them do not have cars or do not travel long distances – this is a tax on the middle classes (I include myself in this) who to be honest have had it too good for too long. Fuel tax does not represent the true cost the environment – especially for gas guzzlers.

The sooner we realise that we are going to have to make changes to the way we live our lives if we want there to be a world for our children and grandchildren to grow up in, the better.

So, sorry I won’t sign this petition, and if you care about the environment, and the world our ancestors will inherit you won’t either.

Now, if you gave me one to stop them putting a tracking device in the car I’d be right there with you.

The Ecologist

An Inconvenient Truth
Originally uploaded by thedword.

Another month, another edition of the only magazine that I feel is worth subscribing to ‘The Ecologist’. Yet again I could fill my blog with ‘titbits’ of information that has made me mad, or just made my giggle!

How about the fact that the American National Science Teachers Association has rejected the gift of 50,000 free copies of the Al Gore film, An Inconvenient Truth’, as it might be seen as a ‘political endorsement’. But then you discover that the Association is supported by the likes of ExxonMobil, Shell and the American Petroleum Institute to name a few!!

Or that the US government has ruled that cloned meat is safe to eat and does not need to be labelled separately.

I could go on, and not all of the stories would come from the States. What would be nice is if some of these stories made it into the mainstream press.